Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Why do Libertarians Think Their Conservatives

Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/2/2013 10:10:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I had a strange talk with someone the other day, they were saying Thomas Jefferson was a conservative and a libertarian(classical libertarian). I laughed because Thomas Jefferson was a radical who supported the French Revolution. It was Alexander Hamilton and John Adams who were conservatives because they believed in order and a paternalistic limited role of government. I will admit there are very few who even hold their political values in today's time.But we have inherited Hamilton's vision of America(large metropolises, trade, central bank), obviously not his politics(a country run by professionals).

So why do libertarians(classical liberals) think they are conservatives? I just assumed it had to do with the increasing role of the state into society. Those who are opposed to this have come to call themselves conservative or libertarian. Are they conservatives? Or they classical liberals in disguise?
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/3/2013 12:17:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/2/2013 10:10:55 PM, Tophatdoc wrote:
I had a strange talk with someone the other day, they were saying Thomas Jefferson was a conservative and a libertarian(classical libertarian). I laughed because Thomas Jefferson was a radical who supported the French Revolution. It was Alexander Hamilton and John Adams who were conservatives because they believed in order and a paternalistic limited role of government. I will admit there are very few who even hold their political values in today's time.But we have inherited Hamilton's vision of America(large metropolises, trade, central bank), obviously not his politics(a country run by professionals).

So why do libertarians(classical liberals) think they are conservatives? I just assumed it had to do with the increasing role of the state into society. Those who are opposed to this have come to call themselves conservative or libertarian. Are they conservatives? Or they classical liberals in disguise?

Back then, Liberal was to go against the status quo of the British monarchy and Conservative was to uphold the status quo of the British monarchy.

Once, the Founders established America, it is Conservative to uphold the principles of the Founders and Liberal to go against the tradition and principles of the American founders.

Conservatism and Liberatarianism has always gone hand in hand. The Libertarian economists like Rothbard, Friedman, and Sowell all vote Republican and had close ties to Barry Goldwater, Joe McCarthy, Ronald Reagan, Pat Buchanan, etc.

Conservatives and Libertarians both believe in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, and humble foreign policy. Neo-Cons and religious fundamentalists are the establishment and fringe, both deviations from Right-Wing conservatism. Barry Goldwater, a Conservative purist and icon, was against the religious right and openly embraced Libertarianism.

Thomas Jefferson: "The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes."

(To Thomas Lomax, 1799. ME 10:123)
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/3/2013 8:52:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/3/2013 12:17:53 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/2/2013 10:10:55 PM, Tophatdoc wrote:
I had a strange talk with someone the other day, they were saying Thomas Jefferson was a conservative and a libertarian(classical libertarian). I laughed because Thomas Jefferson was a radical who supported the French Revolution. It was Alexander Hamilton and John Adams who were conservatives because they believed in order and a paternalistic limited role of government. I will admit there are very few who even hold their political values in today's time.But we have inherited Hamilton's vision of America(large metropolises, trade, central bank), obviously not his politics(a country run by professionals).

So why do libertarians(classical liberals) think they are conservatives? I just assumed it had to do with the increasing role of the state into society. Those who are opposed to this have come to call themselves conservative or libertarian. Are they conservatives? Or they classical liberals in disguise?

Back then, Liberal was to go against the status quo of the British monarchy and Conservative was to uphold the status quo of the British monarchy.

Once, the Founders established America, it is Conservative to uphold the principles of the Founders and Liberal to go against the tradition and principles of the American founders.

Conservatism and Liberatarianism has always gone hand in hand. The Libertarian economists like Rothbard, Friedman, and Sowell all vote Republican and had close ties to Barry Goldwater, Joe McCarthy, Ronald Reagan, Pat Buchanan, etc.

Conservatives and Libertarians both believe in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, and humble foreign policy. Neo-Cons and religious fundamentalists are the establishment and fringe, both deviations from Right-Wing conservatism. Barry Goldwater, a Conservative purist and icon, was against the religious right and openly embraced Libertarianism.

Thomas Jefferson: "The spirit of 1776 is not dead. It has only been slumbering. The body of the American people is substantially republican. But their virtuous feelings have been played on by some fact with more fiction; they have been the dupes of artful maneuvers, and made for a moment to be willing instruments in forging chains for themselves. But times and truth dissipated the delusion, and opened their eyes."

(To Thomas Lomax, 1799. ME 10:123)

I would dispute some of what you mentioned. The monarchy had little role in the status quo. The Americans were revolting against the British Parliament. The King George III myth is tired and worn out because he did not create the legislation. The founders had a problem with the enactment of "unfair" legislation without any form of representation.

It is not liberal to go against the founders. Many who call themselves "liberals" have co-opted a term for their own purposes. Thomas Jefferson was a liberal as I pointed out and not a conservative. Edmund Burke was a Conservative during that period.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Neo-cons and the religious fundamentalists are not the establishment. They maybe the establishment in the Republican Party, but I doubt that. Last time, I checked the religious fundamentalists were the counterculture because they are deemed backward and traditional by the media. I would also say that Neocons are centrists, not right wing because they are paleoliberals(JFK, Truman). Neocons believe in a compassionate foreign policy which means democracy. Versus a realist foreign policy which means being friends and associating with dictatorships is acceptable.

I agree that Libertarianism and Conservatism go hand in hand because neither are a set of dogma. Therefore, ideological purity is not possible because there is no dogma. But also I don't see why some Libertarians won't consider themselves being Neoliberals since there is little difference between the two.
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/3/2013 10:29:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/3/2013 8:52:06 AM, Tophatdoc wrote:
I would dispute some of what you mentioned. The monarchy had little role in the status quo. The Americans were revolting against the British Parliament. The King George III myth is tired and worn out because he did not create the legislation. The founders had a problem with the enactment of "unfair" legislation without any form of representation.

Irrelevant. Whether It was the monarchy or parliament, that was the status quo.

It is not liberal to go against the founders. Many who call themselves "liberals" have co-opted a term for their own purposes. Thomas Jefferson was a liberal as I pointed out and not a conservative. Edmund Burke was a Conservative during that period.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Did you not read anything I wrote? I just explained that. Bank then, Jefferson was considered a Liberal, today he would be a Conservative.

Jefferson is a classical Liberal which is the opposite of modern Liberalism. Today's Libertarian/Conservatives = classical Liberals.

Neo-cons and the religious fundamentalists are not the establishment. They maybe the establishment in the Republican Party, but I doubt that. Last time, I checked the religious fundamentalists were the counterculture because they are deemed backward and traditional by the media.

I was saying that the Neo-Cons are the establishment of the GOP and the religious right is the fringe of the GOP. Both are RINOs.

I would also say that Neocons are centrists, not right wing because they are paleoliberals(JFK, Truman). Neocons believe in a compassionate foreign policy which means democracy. Versus a realist foreign policy which means being friends and associating with dictatorships is acceptable.

Neo-Cons believe in war of aggression and imperialism.

I agree that Libertarianism and Conservatism go hand in hand because neither are a set of dogma.

Um no, that's not why. They go hand in hand because both believe the same principles of limited government, free markets, the Constitution, and individual liberty. Conservatives and Libertarians also fall under the same tent of Republicanism.

Therefore, ideological purity is not possible because there is no dogma. But also I don't see why some Libertarians won't consider themselves being Neoliberals since there is little difference between the two.

There is a massive difference. Libertarians believe in the free market, NeoLiberalism is opposed to the free market.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/3/2013 12:35:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/3/2013 10:29:59 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Did you not read anything I wrote? I just explained that. Bank then, Jefferson was considered a Liberal, today he would be a Conservative.

Jefferson is a classical Liberal which is the opposite of modern Liberalism. Today's Libertarian/Conservatives = classical Liberals.

Many conservatives are not classical liberals. For example, paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan and Samuel Francis. Buchanan does not believe in the free market and he also believes in protectionism. Francis is certainly not fiscally conservative either.
I was saying that the Neo-Cons are the establishment of the GOP and the religious right is the fringe of the GOP. Both are RINOs.

Neoconservatives are not the establishment of the GOP. People may adopt neoconservative foreign policy views but that is where it ends. After all let us remember there was not a single Neoconservative in the cabinets of any Republican president or any president for that matter. Rumsfield, Powell, and Rice were not for creating Afghanistan or Iraq into democracies initially. They wanted to get in and get out and leave it to a strong man to make the rules.

Um no, that's not why. They go hand in hand because both believe the same principles of limited government, free markets, the Constitution, and individual liberty. Conservatives and Libertarians also fall under the same tent of Republicanism.

Not all conservatives believe in free markets. As I said, Pat Buchanan believes in tariffs and he opposed NAFTA. Milton Friedman wrote him saying he is doing the "devil's work." There are many more conservatives who don't like free trade like many Tea Party supporters . Many conservatives are not laissez-faire at all.

There is a massive difference. Libertarians believe in the free market, NeoLiberalism is opposed to the free market.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
You proved my point. Last I checked, F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman were heroes in libertarian circles.

"Scholars now tended to associate it with the theories of economists Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.[2] Once the new meaning of neoliberalism was established as a common usage among Spanish-speaking scholars, it diffused directly into the English-language study of political economy.[3] The term "neoliberal" is now used mainly by those who are critical of legislative initiatives that push for free trade, deregulation, enhanced privatization, and an overall reduction in government control of the economy"
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc
Jonbonbon
Posts: 2,760
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2013 11:29:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why do you think "they're" should be spelled "their"?
The Troll Queen.

I'm also the Troll Goddess of Reason. Sacrifices are appreciated but not necessary.

"I'm a vivacious sex fiend," SolonKR.

Go vote on one of my debates. I'm not that smart, so it'll probably be an easy decision.

Fite me m9

http://www.debate.org...
Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2013 5:36:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/4/2013 11:29:22 AM, Jonbonbon wrote:
Why do you think "they're" should be spelled "their"?

Wow, I was waiting for someone to say that. I realized it a second after I posted it. Don't be trolling.
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc
JackFritschy
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2013 6:45:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The thing is a massive rebranding scheme by liberals. Liberal means supporting change. Thomas jeffersion wanted to create a egalitarian republic. This ment he was liberal. After the freemarket republic was made, people who supported big government called themselves liberals for going against the status qou. This makes them seem like the party of the people.
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2013 8:41:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/4/2013 6:45:55 PM, JackFritschy wrote:
The thing is a massive rebranding scheme by liberals. Liberal means supporting change. Thomas jeffersion wanted to create a egalitarian republic. This ment he was liberal. After the freemarket republic was made, people who supported big government called themselves liberals for going against the status qou. This makes them seem like the party of the people.

Dammit, he's onto us! Someone call the Illuminati.

But seriously, modern liberalism is egalitarian--far more so than libertarianism, which finds entrenched inequality to be just fine so long as the government isn't directly causing it.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2013 3:44:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Hey Geo, remember when Rothbard openly associated and supported the Marcusian 'New Left'?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2013 10:18:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/5/2013 3:44:10 PM, Noumena wrote:
Hey Geo, remember when Rothbard openly associated and supported the Marcusian 'New Left'?

http://www.lewrockwell.com...

And let me note, I openly support Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, and Noam Chomsky but you'll still find me ultimately aligning myself with and voting Republican.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2013 3:00:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/5/2013 10:18:44 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 12/5/2013 3:44:10 PM, Noumena wrote:
Hey Geo, remember when Rothbard openly associated and supported the Marcusian 'New Left'?

http://www.lewrockwell.com...

And let me note, I openly support Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, and Noam Chomsky but you'll still find me ultimately aligning myself with and voting Republican.

I'm aware of Rothbard's turn in the 80's. I've shaken my head quite a bit at that!
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2013 8:59:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/3/2013 8:52:06 AM, Tophatdoc wrote:
Neocons believe in a compassionate foreign policy which means democracy.

Invading other countries and devastating all of their infrastructure, law and order -- then reconstructing it as the invader sees fit (if repair is fixed at all) is compassionate?
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Tophatdoc
Posts: 534
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2013 10:40:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/7/2013 8:59:56 PM, Contra wrote:
At 12/3/2013 8:52:06 AM, Tophatdoc wrote:
Neocons believe in a compassionate foreign policy which means democracy.

Invading other countries and devastating all of their infrastructure, law and order -- then reconstructing it as the invader sees fit (if repair is fixed at all) is compassionate?

Of course it is compassionate unless you think siding with evil is good thing to reap the benefits of trade. The mere thought of siding with evil is disgusting and hateful.

Do you think it was acceptable for the United States to befriend Pol Pot to get back at Vietnam? Or perhaps it is currently acceptable for the United States to be friends with Saudi Arabia? A nepotistic regime which is interested in securing power for the few. I assume it was people like you that thought it was real great to be friends with Mobutu in the Congo , Pinochet in Chile, and previously Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. To side with the malicious tyrants only destroys America's credibility.

The first American president to emphasize a better set of morals was Ronald Reagan when he told Ferdinand Marcos to "cut clear and cut clean." And Ronald Reagan prevented a massacre that would of echoed America's failure of acting for decades.
"Don't click on my profile. Don't send me friend requests. Don't read my debates. There are many interesting people on DDO. Find one of them. Go find someone exciting and loquacious. Go click on their profile. Go send them friend requests. Go read their debates. Leave me alone." -Tophatdoc